Search This Blog

College Athletes Getting Played : Guest Post : Hannah Silva-Breen

Many
kids dream of being a professional athlete, and their first stop is getting a
full ride at the best university in the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic
Association). These kids will have a lot places to choose from, with over 1,000
schools and 400,000 student athletes under the umbrella of the NCAA (Who We Are
1). What they don’t know is that even “full ride” college athletes end up in
debt, along with having the stress of balancing the demanding sport with a just
as demanding course load. Student athletes have a full time job, travel
included, at their university with the sports they play. Scholarships are a
good starting point to compensate them, but it is not enough; collegiate
athletes should get paid every year beyond those scholarships to help keep them
out of debt and make them a more reliable player for their team.

What
many people forget about student athletes is that they’re still students. Just
because they play a sport does not mean they get a free pass in their classes.
Some athletes may have professors that give them a little later deadlines, or
make up labs, but if they fail, they fail. Athletes must at least meet the minimum
GPA standards in place to graduate, and take certain amounts of credits each
term (depending on the division) to stay eligible to play (Remaining Eligible
1). Tyson Hartnett, currently a writer for the Huffington Post and an alum of NCAA college athletics, explains: “On a typical day, a player will
wake up before classes, get a lift or conditioning session in, go to class
until 3 or 4 p.m., go to practice, go to mandatory study hall, and then finish
homework or study for a test” (Harnett 1). Harnett continues to talk about his
roommate, who had a “full ride” but still needed money: “He would work his butt
off all day, with two or sometimes three basketball training sessions, plus
classes and homework, and go to that job for a few hours late at night. He would
come back exhausted, but he needed whatever money they would pay him” (Harnett
1). He continues to explain that his roommate was forced to quit his job once
the season started up, and could only use the money he had saved up. That
doesn’t sound like what all the young athletes dream of doing, does it? But it
doesn’t end there.

The life of a college athlete is not
just this “free” education and grueling schedule; many players end up paying
for a lot more than they bargained for. Researchers at Ithaca College
discovered that on average, Division 1 athletes pay $2,951 in school-related
expenses - after their “full scholarship” (FYI: College Athletes Have Debt, Too
1). For many people, when thinking about attending college, they expect to pay
extra for miscellaneous expenses. But for students who are promised a
scholarship and sign a National Letter of Intent saying they’ll get free
tuition and room and board, they are shocked when they realize it says nothing
about books, computers, parking fees, and food and are at a loss when all their
cash runs out fast. The new study The
Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sports discovered that on average
85.5% of players are living below the federal poverty line. They also estimated
the "fair market value" to the universities of these studied football
and basketball players was between $120,048 and $265,027 (Nance-Nash 1). There
are many opposing arguments saying that people with academic scholarships are
helped enough, so it’s not necessary to try and help athletes, but no one
really explains how different these types of scholarships are.

When comparing academic and athletic
scholarships, the only similarity is the fact that each student, whether or not
they’re getting an athletic or academic scholarship, must maintain certain
standards to keep that scholarship. However, those standards vary dramatically.
David Wunderlich who studied Decision and Information Sciences at the
University of Florida explains: “Academic scholarship requirements are far less
subjective than athletic scholarship expectations. You know ahead of time
what’s required to keep an academic scholarship, and you can change majors to
keep it if you struggle in your chosen field of study. You get periodic
progress reports in the form of graded work and exams to know where you stand
in each class” (Wunderlich 1). These academic requirements and progress reports
are in complete contrast to athletes and their teams. Athletes can’t switch to
a different sport like a new major, and they don’t get progress reports (or
warnings) from coaches telling them that they’re on the verge of breaking the
rules or not meeting the standards. Also, it’s rare to see students who travel
as often as athletes do (a few days or weeks at a time), and the students with
the academic scholarships won't have as many miscellaneous, necessary expenses.
But then the next frequently-asked question is, don’t high schoolers learn all
of this before they sign up? It’s their choice to do this, right?

Scoop
Jackson from ESPN argues just that:
“Every student who signs a letter of intent or agrees to accept a scholarship
to play a sport knows going in that the school's job is to make the most money
off of his or her efforts. They agree to that. It's no different than a
professional athlete signing a contract” (Jackson 1). What Jackson doesn’t take
into account is the fact that the people signing these contracts are 15-17 year
olds, and the only help they usually have reading over their contracts is their
parents. Professional athletes have lawyers to read and change contracts if
needed. These high schoolers are too excited to be living their dream to
understand what every technical term the contract says. They do - or should -
know that yes, the colleges are looking to make money of the programs, but when they’re only getting a couple tens of
thousands of dollars to cover tuition when their net worth to the school is over $200,000, there’s no good reason they
shouldn’t be getting more. In the most popular sports programs, like Duke
University, many basketball players are valued at over $1,000,000 while living
just a few hundred dollars over the poverty line (Nance-Nash 1). This isn’t
just; it’s taking advantage of them, and exploiting the talents these college
athletes hold.

Another common argument against paying
college athletes is that with the lack of financial incentive, the programs
weed out the poorly-focused or the undedicated players. But it would be just
the opposite. When a school gives an athletic scholarship to a player, they
cannot take it away unless the player voluntarily quits the team or breaks
NCAA, university, or team rules (Fitzgerald 1). But by giving these athletes
extra money, they’d be more invested to stay on the team and make the team
successful and popular; the less success the team has, the less excess money
they could possibly be giving to the players. If you had a president of any
multimillion or billion dollar company (like a university, for example) do
their job for free, it’s safe to assume they would not work as hard, if at all.
Give them their hefty paychecks back and it would be business as usual. It’s
not only fair, but it’s an investment on the school and the NCAA’s part to help
create healthier and more successful sports programs.

Yet,
the NCAA prides itself on keeping these student athletes amateurs. The President of the NCAA, Mark
Emmert, explains: "you have something very different from collegiate
athletics. One of the guiding principles (of the NCAA) has been that this is
about students who play sports” (NCAA President: Not a Good idea 1). But the
NCAA has never explained or shown any reasons for why it’s such a bad thing for
them to be “professional” athletes in college. It’s not much different from
college students who get paid to assist with a research project or internship
that follows their career interests. Technically, that would make those
students “professionals” in that field as well. If the athletes at the
university want to have their careers involve sports, the NCAA has no reason
not to support them financially similarly to academic internships.

One
way to fix these problems is to pay these athletes enough to cover their basic
needs and necessities, but not too much to demean their education. There are
two places this money could come from, the first being the universities
themselves. A lot of the direct profit (game tickets, concessions, etc.) go
straight back to the athletic programs, which then goes to coaches and funding
new equipment, uniforms, and facilities. College coaches earn at least $100,000
a year (Harnett 1) and there are a minimum of three coaches per team. That can
get up to half a million dollars just for coaching alone. Then there are
programs that have a single coach getting paid in the millions. Coach Mike Krzyzewski, also known as “Coach K” from Duke University made 9.7
million dollars in 2011 alone (Medcalf 1). Coaching is very important in any
sport, but coaches don’t win the games, the players do. Without the players,
Coach K’s dynasty at Duke wouldn’t exist. That’s the first place the
compensation could come from for these players. However, not every team is as
successful as Duke University. In that case, the programs would set a minimum
per athlete to help out the less successful or less popular sports without
hurting the overall program by taking out too much money.

The
second place to look for change is to the NCAA. There are many different
opinions about the NCAA. Some say they’re extremely helpful in keeping players
under control in college, while others say the NCAA is just there to make money
and doesn’t care about the players or programs. Either way, the bottom line is
the NCAA is an extremely profitable organization. On the NCAA’s official
website they state: “For 2011-12, the most recent year for which audited
numbers are available. NCAA revenue was $871.6 million” (Revenue 1). If you
divide that money up by the 400,000 players that participate in the NCAA, they
would each get about $2,000. This would help the players, the programs, and
help keep the NCAA’s prideful “non-profit” reputation. In that same study, The Price of Poverty in Big Time College
Sports they also explain: “the NCAA explicitly allows college athletes to
accept food stamps and welfare benefits. ‘The NCAA is forcing taxpayers to pay
for expenses that players would be able to pay themselves if not for NCAA
rules’” (Nance-Nash 1). There is no reason that these players giving up their
time risking their and bodies should be forced to accept food stamps when they
could be getting paid by the same organization that pays their executives an
average of one million dollars a year (Harnett 1). The NCAA should encourage a
healthier life if they’re truly that focused on helping the players. This
doesn’t happen when these athletes can’t afford to buy enough food when they’re
out on the road.

NCAA
athletics isn’t high school sports. These aren’t minors playing for fun. These
are collegiate student athletes playing for a purpose and for a goal: to get to
the next level of becoming professional athletes. For many of these players,
that next level never comes, whether through injury or simply not getting
drafted. If players continue to be unpaid employees, raising money for their
school and the NCAA, those years might become a waste. Lives get changed by
academic failure, permanent injuries, or simply unfulfilled life dreams.
Referees are part of sports to keep games fair, but it’s time to make the
college athletic programs fair to the players.

Works Cited

Fitzgerald,
Dan. "When Can a School Take Away Your Scholarship?" Connecticut Sports

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When I first began my private mental health practice, I knew one thing was certain: I needed to meet as many area clergy as I could. Today I had the pleasure of having coffee with an another local parish pastor. Thanks, C!

So many people still experience embarrassment, resistance and fear when it comes to seeking therapy for relationships, emotions, or behaviors, they stall when it comes to getting help. They may talk to their friend or family member. They may occasionally tell their physician about how they feel. But as they get ready to reach for help, they may also talk to their pastor.

Most pastors are great at emotional triage. Trained in basic listening skills, taught how to manage themselves in emergencies, experienced at handling emotions at funerals, parish clergy are the go-to folks in many people's lives when it comes to figuring out what to do when the going gets rough. I am honored so many people trusted their lives to me over my years in the parish. I learned early …

Wow. That's all I could say. As a pastor, I would occasionally visit with people who reported Near Death Experiences (NDE) on an operating room table, a hospital bed, during a car accident or heart attack. Without the necessary and pretty impossible to get research, I wasn't sure what to think about these very similar but unusual events in people's lives. All I could say was Wow.

This article, published April, 2012, in the online magazine Salon, is written by psychology professor and research scientist at the University of Montreal, Mario Beauregard. It is excerpted from his book, "The Brain Wars," and talks of recent research into this quite common human event.

I was always talking about life after death, but was quite sure I knew, really knew, nothing about it. I would speak in the language, images and ideas of my Christian faith tradition. Here is new brain research that confirms what many have said about their experiences, and points to a new truth: that the…